SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.C. SHAH, C.J.I., K.S. HEGDE AND A.N. GROVER, JJ.
State of Punjab, Appellant
Versus
Hira Lal and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 1218 of 1968,
D/-18-12-1970.
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 133 (1) (c) and 16 (1) - Appointments - Promotion - Reserved for members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes - Respondents Nos. 1 and 3 to this appeal were both working in Forest Department of Government as Head Assistants - Respondent No. 1 was senior to Respondent No. 3 - Respondent No. 3 belonged to a Scheduled Caste - Hence in view of order of Government, Respondent No. 3 was promoted temporarily as Superintendent ignoring claim of Respondent No. 1. Aggrieved by that order Respondent No. 1 moved High Court of Punjab to quash promotion of Respondent No. 3 and direct Government to promote him as Superintendent in place of Respondent No. 3 - High Court has quashed promotion of Respondent No. 3 - High Court was persuaded by Counsel for first respondent to visualise various hypothetical cases under which reservation of type impugned in present case could lead to various anomalies such as person getting benefit of reservation may jump over heads of several of his Seniors not only in his own grade but even in higher grade – Held, In the context expression "adequately represented" imports considerations of "size" as well as "values", numbers as well as nature of appointments held and so it involves not merely the numerical test but also qualitative one - It is thus by operation of the numerical and a qualitative test that the adequacy or otherwise of representation of backward classes in any service has to be judged and if that be so, it would not be reasonable to hold that inadequacy of representation can and must be cured only by reserving a proportionately higher percentage of appointments at initial stage - There was no material before High Court and there is no material before Court from which we can conclude that impugned order is violative of Article 16 (1) - Reservation of appointments under Article 16 (4) cannot be struck down on hypothetical grounds or on imaginary possibilities - He who assails reservation under that Article must satisfactorily establish that there has been a violation of Article 16 (1) - Appeal allowed.
Judgment
HEGDE, J. :- On September 12, 1963, the Government of Punjab passed the following order:
"Subject : Reservation for the members of Scheduled Castes. Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes in promotion cases.
Sir,
I am directed to refer you to the subject noted above and to any that at present reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes is applicable to new appointments and not to promotions which are governed by consideration of merit and seniority alone. Since those castes/ classes are poorly represented in various services in the upper grades under the State Government, it has been under the active consideration of Government that some reservation in higher grade posts as well should be made for them. It was now been decided that except in the case of All India services 10 per cent. of the higher posts to be filed by promotion should be reserved for the members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes (9 per cent. for the members of Scheduled . Castes and Scheduled Tribes and 1 per cent for the Backward Classes) subject to the following conditions:
(a) the persons to be considered must possess the minimum necessary qualification; and
(b) they should have at least a satisfactory record of service."
2. Up till that date reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes was confined to initial recruitment. The first out of every five initial recruitments was reserved for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes or other Backward Classes.
3. On January 14,1964, the Government clarified its order dated September 12, 1963. In this case we are not concerned with the first paragraph of that clarification. The second paragraph of that clarification reads thus:
"Government have since then been receiving references from several quarters seeking clarification in regard to the implementation of the said decision. After careful consideration of the matter, it has now been decided that:-
(a) The said decision should be applied to all promotion posts already vacant on 12th September, 1963, or falling vacant thereafter.
(b) The reservation should not imply that 10 per cent. of the total posts reserved for promotion in any cadre have to be filled by Scheduled Castes personnel in the sense that all existing/future vacancies will be filled up by Scheduled Castes/Tribes and other Backward Classes candidates until their share in higher services comes up to 10 per cent.
(c) This provision of reservation applies to all State services including Classes I, II, III and IV posts, the only exception being All India Services.
(d) This reservation should apply even in the case of short term leave vacancies unless it is likely to involve unnecessary dislocation of work in different offices and avoidable expenditure and inconvenience due to midyear transfers, etc.
(e) So far as Scheduled Castes/ Tribes are concerned, the very first vacancy existing on/arising after the 12th September, 1963, should be treated as reserved for them and only if no such official is available for promotion against the vacancy reserved for them in the first block of 10 vacancies, a candidate belonging to other Backward Classes may be selected in preference to the remaining officials against one such post only out of one hundred, since the reservation for other Backward Classes may not exceed 1 per cent. However, if Scheduled Castes/Tribes candidates are available to fill one out of every ten vacancies, the specific reservation in favour of other Backward Classes should be the 51st vacancy.
(f) One reserved vacancy should be carried over to the next block of ten vacancies in case it cannot be filled up within any block of ten posts. Thus if no Scheduled Castes/Tribes/ Backward Classes candidate is promoted against any of the first 10 vacancies the number of vacancies available to such candidates in the following block will be two.
(g) In case an out of turn promotion has already been given to a candidate belonging to Sched
referred to : Minor A. Peerikaruppan. etc. v. State of Tamil Nadu
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.